There seems to be some confusion and asumptions at play here. Im aiming at the idea of "things" that have an effect on virtually everyone, but that most are not aware of effecting them. So yes the walls do restrict then but the awareness of that restriction isnt there. Meaning; if they was aware of the walls, and the once who are aware of them, do not have to option of doing or interacting with what is behind the walls. As then force and/or the threat of force would be used agaisnt us. Does this make the question more clear?

Here is one analogy: Awareness of the wall: its a glass wall and you see whats on the other side and want to explore it.
None awareness of the wall: The wall is a tall black scary looking one that have always been there, so you dont even know if there is anything on the other side.

In regards to what it seems to me, is your concept of freedome; You, as a prisoner or as a slave knowing you was one, regards yourself as 100% free, because you was free to think, do and act within the constraints of the prison or slave owner.

There is a diference between freely waling into limitation, and unwilingly being lead or forced into it. And to tie it a little together; if you have been blinded by walls of "I dont have a choise", is that then to be free and to make that "choise" yourself?

Lastly; It may be, however that ther eis a seperate point you wish to point out with how you word things. And im here too focused on the point im making with my questions. And the oposite may also be true, that you cant see the point im making. So yes, if the walls or conceptual prison does in no way restrict someone, then there is no reason to make them aware of it existing. But that is not what I am basing my question on.. My goal is merely understanding, not to shoot the messenger :)